The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About03-21-2017 Item 15, CombsCOUNCIL MEETING:' I I� ITEM NO.: . Council Memorandum Date: March 16, 2017 TO: City Council FROM: Ron Combs VIA: Katie Lichtig, City Manager K SUBJECT: Modification to Tree Committee Minutes of January 23, 2017 RECEIVED MAR 16 2011 Please note that packet page 226 of the Tree Committee Draft Meeting Minutes of January 23,2017 Roll Call has been modified as shown below. Roll Call (excerpt from January 23, 2017) Present: Alan Bate, Scott Loosley, Vice Chair Ben Parker, Jane Worthy, Chair Matt Ritter Angela Soil, Rodney Thurman Absent: None Angela Sell, Staff: Ron Combs, City Arborist and Lisa Woske, Recording Secretary _ f 1 - ► i — ► f ► i f A ► a v s • } Minutes J �r �Y�I■ Tree Committee Corporation Yard Conference Room, 25 Prado Road, San Luis Obispo 5:00 pm. Monday, January 23, 2017 Regular Meeting of the Tree Committee Commission CALL TO ORDER A Regular Meeting of the Tree Committee was called to order on Monday, January 23, 2017 at 5:00 p.m. in the Corporation Yard Conference Room, located at 25 Prado Road, San Luis Obispo, California, by Chair Matt Ritter. ROLL CALL Present: Alan Bate, Scott Loosley, Vice Chair Ben Parker, Jane Worthy, Chair Matt Ritter Angela Soll, Rodney Thurman Absent: None Staff: Ron Combs, City Arborist and Lisa Woske, Recording Secretary PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA Re: 71 Palomar Joanie Volmer thanks the Committee for their time and review of the item, noting many were under the impression the Committee requested to review the item again before it went to the ARC based on the Rincon report not being accurate. She was disappointed that secondary review did not happen, as she did not favor removing the trees. Allan Cooper discussed his submitted letter to the Committee and agreed with Ms. Volmer's comments, stating the city did not request a new Rincon report and allow the Committee to review it as an item on this meeting's agenda. Cheryl McLean discussed her submitted letter to the Committee and reiterated the above comments, stating the Committee should have had access to the Responses to Comments and Attachment 8 of the Final Initial Study. She encouraged the Committee to continue discussing the item. Steve Williams stated the property was in a residential area and did not favor the proposed development. He also agreed with David Brody's letter regarding the negative impact of tree removals in light of climate change. Lydia Mourenza agreed with previous comments and asked the Committee to put the item on their next agenda. Dr. Edward Benson, 593 Luneta, valued the mature trees which were a wildlife habitat and did not favor the proposed development. Bob Mourenza discussed evidence of an owl habitat in the trees and felt that should be protected. Will Power did not agree with the development and felt the Committee should be initially evaluating such permits. He felt key personnel of city management was too involved with permit fees and politics regarding developments and mega complexes. He urged that the long-term health of the city be protected. CONSENT AGENDA CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES 1. Consideration of December 12, 2016 Minutes Mr. Loosley noted where his name was spelled incorrectly and that Item 2 address should be listed as 1234 San Carlos. ACTION: MOTION BY VICE CHAIR BEN PARKER, SECONDED BY COMMITTEE MEMBER SCOTT LOOSLEY, to approve the minutes of the Tree Committee for the special meeting of Monday, December 12, 2016 as amended. Motion passed 6 -0 -on the following roll call vote: AYES: BATE, LOOSLEY, PARKER, RITTER, SOLL, THURMAN, WORTHY NOES: NONE PUBLIC HEARINGS BUSINESS ITEM 2. Tree Removal Applications - 990 PALM (4 eucalyptus) Steve Williams, City representative, discussed the removal request and noted that even though the trees look healthy, there was decay in the soil and the tall trees would no longer be protected by the building wall and would ultimately fall. Pruning was not an option. Mr. Combs agreed there were structural flaws in the trunks and roots and shared the City's concerns. Public Comments: Chair Ritter opened the public hearing. Mr. Power suggested bracing the trees against the AT&T building. Mr. Williams said cabling/bracing would not mitigate falling. DRAFT Minutes — Tree Committee Meeting of January 23, 2017 Page 2 Chair Ritter closed the public hearing. Mr. Parker agreed with the fungal issues and the risk of falling. Ms. Soll suggested a different replacement species other than jacaranda. Mr. Thurman felt it was the wrong tree in the wrong place. ACTION: MOTION BY COMMITTEE VICE CHAIR PARKER, SECONDED BY COMMITTEE MEMBER LOOSLEY, to approve the removal request based on promoting good arboricultural practice and required replacement plantings with four 24" trees to be chosen from the Master Street Tree list and planted within 45 days of tree removals. Motion passed 7-0 on the following roll call vote: AYES: BATE, LOOSLEY, PARKER, RITTER, SOLL, THURMAN, WORTHY NOES: NONE - 1633 PEREIRA (Liquid amber) Teresa De Martini, applicant, discussed the removal request and the hardship maintaining the tree, as well as the root issues and curb/sidewalk damage. She was concerned about accessibility issues for neighbors. Mr. Combs reported that the tree was healthy and causing hardscape issues. Public Comments: Chair Ritter opened the public hearing. Mr. Power felt the tree should be maintained instead of removed. Chair Ritter closed the public hearing. The Committee discussed the application, noting that the debris and damage posed risks and that the tree had multiple leaders and included bark. ACTION: MOTION BY COMMITTEE VICE CHAIR PARKER, SECONDED BY COMMITTEE MEMBER BATE, to approve the removal request based on promoting good arboricultural practice and required replacement planting of one 15 -gallon tree to be chosen from the Master Street Tree list and planted within 45 days of tree removal. Motion passed 7-0 on the following roll call vote: AYES: BATE, LOOSLEY, PARKER, RITTER, SOLL, THURMAN, WORTHY NOES: NONE - 4385 WAVERTREE There was no one to speak to the item. DRAFT Minutes — Tree Committee Meeting of January 23, 2017 Page 3 - 1050 E. FOOTHILL (2 redwoods) Bill Van Horbek, Stenner Glen representative, discussed the removal request and stated the trees were causing drainage issues and problems in the pool area. Mr. Combs reported that he could not make the necessary findings for removal. Public Comments: Chair Ritter opened the public hearing. Mr. Power felt the trees should be maintained instead of removed. Chair Ritter closed the public hearing. The Committee discussed the application. Members Thurman, Bate, Parker, and Worthy agreed the debris and damage posed risks and that the trees were failing with drought -stress, multiple leaders and included bark and that the lifting posed a safety hazard. Ms. Soll discussed possible mitigation measures to retain the trees and fix the damage. Staff noted that would not be a long-term solution. ACTION: MOTION BY COMMITTEE MEMBER THURMAN, SECONDED BY COMMITTEE MEMBER WORTHY, to approve the removal request based on promoting good arboricultural practice and required replacement planting of two 15 -gallon tree to be chosen from the Master Street Tree list and planted within 45 days of tree removals. Motion passed 6-1 on the following roll call vote: AYES: BATE, LOOSLEY, PARKER, RITTER, THURMAN, WORTHY NOES: SOLL - 642 STONERIDGE (3 palms) Larry Rutter, applicant, discussed the removal request and stated the trees were too close to the residence and too large for the area. He was concerned they would impact the utility box and noted the site was heavily planted. Mr. Combs reported that the trees were healthy and he could not make the necessary findings for removal. Public Comments: Chair Ritter opened the public hearing. Mr. Power favored the removals. Chair Ritter closed the public hearing. The Committee discussed the application. DRAFT Minutes — Tree Committee Meeting of January 23, 2017 Page 4 ACTION: MOTION BY COMMITTEE MEMBER LOOSLEY, SECONDED BY VICE CHAIR PARKER, to approve the removal request for only the two trees closest to the house, based on promoting good arboricultural practice and required two 15 -gallon trees to be donated to the City. Motion passed 6-1 on the following roll call vote: AYES: BATE, LOOSLEY, PARKER, RITTER, SOLL, THURMAN NOES: WORTHY 2466 AUGUSTA (6 trees) Marc Brazil, applicant's representative, discussed the removal request and the safety concerns, as well as the remodel plans, landscaping and pool installation. Mr. Combs reported that the trees were healthy and he could not make the necessary findings for removal. Public Comments: Chair Ritter opened the public hearing. Mr. Power felt the trees should be retained and did not agree with the scope of the development. Chair Ritter closed the public hearing. The Committee agreed to vote on the trees separately. #1: Members Thurman, Loosley and Bate felt decay was evident and it was not the best tree to be at a driveway entrance. Members Parker, Ritter, and Worthy favored retaining and pruning the tree. ACTION: MOTION BY COMMITTEE MEMBER WORTHY, SECONDED BY CHAIR RITTER, to deny the removal of Tree #1, as she could not make the findings necessary to approve removal. Motion passed 5-2 on the following roll call vote: AYES: LOOSLEY, PARKER, RITTER, SOLL, WORTHY NOES: BATE, THURMAN #2: The Committee agreed that the tree was infested and stressed and did not impede on the development footprint. ACTION: MOTION BY COMMITTEE MEMBER LOOSLEY, SECONDED BY VICE CHAIR PARKER, to approve the removal request for Tree #2, based on promoting good arboricultural practice and required replacement to be implemented through the proposed landscaping plan. Motion passed 7-0 on the following roll call vote: DRAFT Minutes — Tree Committee Meeting of January 23, 2017 Page 5 AYES: BATE, LOOSLEY, PARKER, RITTER, SOLL, THURMAN, WORTHY NOES: NONE #3 The Committee agreed that the tree had nice structure and minor decay and felt it could be retained and pruned. They suggested the applicant come back to review removal should the pool installation be approved and the tree remained in the way of that feature. ACTION: MOTION BY COMMITTEE MEMBER LOOSLEY, SECONDED BY VICE CHAIR PARKER, to deny the removal of Tree #3, as he could not make the findings necessary to approve removal. Motion passed 7-0 on the following roll call vote: AYES: BATE, LOOSLEY, PARKER, RITTER, SOLL, THURMAN, WORTHY NOES: NONE rX, Z1F;.V ACTION: MOTION BY CHAIR RITTER, SECONDED BY COMMITTEE MEMBER SOLL, to table action on Tree #4 & #5 removals until a pool permit is issued. Motion passed 7- 0 on the following roll call vote: AYES: BATE, LOOSLEY, PARKER, RITTER, SOLL, THURMAN, WORTHY NOES: NONE #6 The Committee agreed it was not a good landscape tree and that it could be replaced with a Coast Live Oak. ACTION: MOTION BY VICE CHAIR PARKER, SECONDED BY COMMITTEE MEMBER LOOSLEY, to approve the removal request for Tree #6, based on promoting good arboricultural practice and required replacement to be implemented through the proposed landscaping plan. Motion passed 7-0 on the following roll call vote: AYES: BATE, LOOSLEY, PARKER, RITTER, SOLL, THURMAN, WORTHY NOES: NONE NEW BUSINESS ■ Discuss revisions to the Master Street Tree List Mr. Combs discussed potential revisions to the Master Street Tree list, reporting that Doug Forest had been reviewing the document and made some corrections and suggestions for Committee review. The Committee members agreed to provide staff with any individual revisions and suggestions for on-going discussion. OLD BUSINESS ■ Tree replanting replacement enforcement DRAFT Minutes — Tree Committee Meeting of January 23, 2017 Page 6 Mr. Forest discussed revisions to the language regarding enforcement measures to determine if replacement plantings take place as ordered. The Committee members agreed to provide staff with any individual revisions and suggestions for on-going discussion. ARBORIST REPORT There was discussion on ordinance revisions and a streamlined process for staff and Committee regarding reviewing development plans regarding tree removals and landscape plans between agencies. The Committee agreed to forward any comments to staff. COMMITTEE COMMUNICATIONS There was general discussion about how the Rincon report pertaining to 71 Palomar failed to come back to the Committee for review prior to the ARC meeting. ADJOURNMENT. The meeting was adjourned at 7:20 p.m. The next regular meeting of the Tree Committee is scheduled for Monday, February 27 at 5:00 p.m., at the Corporation Yard, 25 Prado Road, San Luis Obispo, California. APPROVED BY THE TREE COMMITTEE ON FEBRUARY 27, 2017 REVISED MARCH 16, 2017 TO ACCURATELY REFLECT ROLL CALL DRAFT Minutes — Tree Committee Meeting of January 23, 2017 Page 7